A young teenage girl was about to finish her first year of college. She considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat but her father was a rather staunch Republican.
One day she was challenging her father on his beliefs and his opposition to taxes and welfare programs. He stopped her and asked her how she was doing in school.
She answered that she had a 4.0 GPA but it was really tough. She had to study all the time, never had time to go out and party. She didn't have time for a boyfriend and didn't really have many college friends because of spending all her time studying.
He asked, "How is your friend Mary." She replied that Mary was barely getting by. She had a 2.0 GPA, never studied, but was very popular on campus, went to all the parties all the time. Why she often didn't show up for classes because she was hung over.
Dad then asked his daughter why she didn't go to the Dean's office and ask why she couldn't take 1.0 off her 4.0 and give it to her friend who only had a 2.0. That way they would both have a 3.0 GPA.
The daughter angrily fired back, "That wouldn't be fair, I worked really hard for mine and Mary has done nothing".
The father slowly smiled and said, "Welcome to the Republican Party".
I think this scenario may be a little unfair...
What if the daughter was just naturally able, and didn't really have to study that hard for her good grades?
What if Mary worked really hard, but just wasn't as capable of earning decent grades?
And what about John, a guy that the daughter doesn't even know, who, for whatever reason, isn't making the grade either?
Surely there must be a scenario that would make the daughter happy to give up what she rightfully earned and assume responsibility for someone else...
8 comments:
If everyone were given equal, no matter their abilities or effort, there would be no drive, no final end prize, to do more than necessary, or more than anyone else.
When it comes to the policy of "redistributing wealth", I feel that there are two principles that need to be considered above all else:
Lest someone think I'm a liberal, one of the two most important considerations is that people must be rewarded for a job well done. If they aren't, then our economy will stagnate because people will learn that the only important thing is doing just enough to get by.
Lest someone think I'm a conservative, the other of the two most important considerations is that basic needs must be met for all people because the lower class will revolt at some point if the gap between the higher and the lower classes gets too wide.
Amen, Marly!
I am called to work hard. It serves God and my fellow man. This is why I do it. And it gives me great pleasure. Right now, I am blessed to be financially rewarded for it, too. Many are not so fortunate. It doesn't bother me in the least to fund programs with my tax dollars that help people. No, the programs aren't perfect, and some people take advantage of them. But that is between those people and God. I am called to be a cheerful giver.
I have no problem giving money away--however my competitive nature NEVER would've let me even CONSIDER giving someone a fraction of a point off of my hard-earned GPA. Sorry. :o)
The constant battle between the two parties reminds me of the game "tug of war." Usually, not always, the only way one side can win is by tugging so hard that that they all collapse on top of each other. The other side is left not necessary winning but they are still standing.
Not that it really adds much to the conversation nor does the my above opinion. But there's not much attention paid to GPA once you are done with college.
I am surprised "Tug of War" has not been banned yet from public school.
I have absolutely no problem paying taxes to fund social welfare programs! Redistribution of wealth is fine, people don't need to be "equal" but basic needs should not be a luxury. Like one of the previous posters said, yes, there is some abuse of the system, but that is between them and God.
Ick, I hate politics...
But I agree with you, raging liberal that I am.
Post a Comment